Allowed

The India Cements Limited v. M/S. Aravindan Agencies

Madras HC1 Dec 2023CRL A/1176/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal against the dismissal of a private complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for non-prosecution not on merits, the High Court set aside the trial court judgment. The appellant was unaware of the listing and final notice, leading to a dismissal on technicality. The Court restored the case to the trial file.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment dated 24.08.2022 set aside; case C.C.No.8794 of 2019 restored to trial Court file.

The India Cements Limited Vs M/S. Aravindan Agencies — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 01.12.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶7

The India Cements Limited, Represented by its Authorized person Mr.S.Kannan, Registered office at No.827, Dhun Building, Mount Road, Chennai-600002, Corporate office at Coromandel Towers, 93, Santhome High Road, Karpagam Avenue, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai-600028. ... Appellant -Vs-

¶8

1.M/S.Aravindan Agencies, Prop: Mr.R.Ravichandran.

¶9

2.Prop: Mr.R.Ravichandran, Proprietor M/s.Aravindan Agencies, Both Accused having common business address at 125 A, Main Road, Thanneerpandhal, Sirkali, Nagapattinam District-609102. ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.8794 of 2019 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, FTC-1, Egmore @ Allikulam, and set aside the judgment, dated 24.08.2022.

¶11

For Appellants : Mr.V.Vijayakumar For Respondents : No Appearance

¶12

Page No.1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

This Criminal Appeal is filed against the dismissal of the case in C.C.No.8794 of 2019 filed the appellant/complainant for non-prosecution under Section 256 Cr.P.C., on 24.08.2022 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court-I, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai (trial Court).

¶16

2.The appellant as complainant filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in C.C.No.8794 of 2019 against the respondent/accused. Due to non-appearance of the appellant, the case has been dismissed for non-prosecution merely on technicality and not on merits.

¶17

3.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is leading cement manufacturer in India manufacturing various grades of cements and sells the same through the dealers/stockiest on exclusive/non-exclusive basis. The respondent is one of the dealers at Alangudi, Pudukottai District to sell the products of the appellant. The respondent was having some credit transaction with the appellant. In

¶18

Page No.2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶20

discharge of the credit, the respondent gave cheque for a sum of Rs.3,70,000/- to the appellant. When the same was presented, got dishonored. After following all statutory procedures, the case has been filed. The appellant has got several cases against the defaulters who had given cheque, not honoured. More than 150 cases are pending before the same trial Court.

¶21

4.The learned counsel further submitted that the counsel appearing regularly before the trial Court, representing and prosecuting the complaints on behalf of the appellant. On 24.08.2022, the appellant was not aware about listing of the above case. Earlier to it also not received the final notice, dated 28.06.2022. Be that as it may, the appellant does not find fault for the mishap by the trial Court. His only contention is that the impugned judgment to be set aside and the complaint to be taken on file and to take the complaint to its logical end. The appellant would complete the trial of the case without any delay. Being a complainant, he is very much interested to complete the trial without delay. Hence, prays for setting aside the impugned judgment of the trial Court.

¶22

Page No.3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶24

5.It is seen that the complaint dismissed for non-prosecution and not on merits. Hence, notice to the respondent not required. In view of the same, this Court is of the view that real justice can only only fulfledged trial and thereafter, judgment. Hence, this Court set asides the impugned judgment, dated 24.08.2022 passed by the trial Court in C.C.No.8794 of 2019. Accordingly, the case is C.C.No.8794 of 2019 is restored to the file of the trial Court.

¶25

6.The trial Court is directed to issue notice for the appearance of the respondent if needed send notice through the jurisdiction Police and ensure his presence. This exercise to be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶26

7.The appellant shall appear before the trial Court, be ready with

¶27

affidavit and all documents and proceed with the case without further delay.

¶28

Page No.4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶30

8.In the result, this Criminal Appeal stands allowed.

¶31

01.12.2023

¶32

vv2

¶33

Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Internet: Yes/No Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No To The Metropolitan Magistrate, FTC-1, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai.

¶34

Page No.5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶36

M.NIRMAL KUMAR,. J.

¶37

vv2

¶38

Crl.A.No.1176 of 2023

¶39

01.12.2023

¶40

Page No.6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The India Cements Limited v. M/S. Aravindan Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The India Cements Limited v. M/S. Aravindan Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sivakumar Nair Vs State by

T.Shanthi Vs S.Thanikasalam

K.Murugesan Vs State rep. by

Kalaimani Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Jaganathan Vs Inspector of Police

Jaganathan Vs Inspector of Police